4.8 Article

SARS-CoV-2 Infection Depends on Cellular Heparan Sulfate and ACE2

期刊

CELL
卷 183, 期 4, 页码 1043-+

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.09.033

关键词

-

资金

  1. RAPID grant from the National Science Foundation [2031989]
  2. NIH [P01 HL131474, R01 AI146779]
  3. Alfred Benzon Foundation
  4. Massachusetts Consortium on Pathogen Readiness (MassCPR) grant
  5. DOD [W81XWH-20-1-0270]
  6. Fluomics/NOSI [U19 AI135972]
  7. Career Award for Medical Scientists from the Burroughs Wellcome Fund
  8. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1170236]
  9. Huck Institutes of the Life Sciences
  10. Penn State start-up funds
  11. Danish National Research Foundation [DNRF107]
  12. T32 training grants [GM007753, AI007245]
  13. Innovation Fund Denmark
  14. VAR2 Pharmaceuticals
  15. Division Of Integrative Organismal Systems
  16. Direct For Biological Sciences [2031989] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We show that SARS-CoV-2 spike protein interacts with both cellular heparan sulfate and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) through its receptor-binding domain (RBD). Docking studies suggest a heparin/heparan sulfate-binding site adjacent to the ACE2-binding site. Both ACE2 and heparin can bind independently to spike protein in vitro, and a ternary complex can be generated using heparin as a scaffold. Electron micrographs of spike protein suggests that heparin enhances the open conformation of the RBD that binds ACE2. On cells, spike protein binding depends on both heparan sulfate and ACE2. Unfractionated heparin, non-anticoagulant heparin, heparin lyases, and lung heparan sulfate potently block spike protein binding and/or infection by pseudotyped virus and authentic SARS-CoV-2 virus. We suggest a model in which viral attachment and infection involves heparan sulfate-dependent enhancement of binding to ACE2. Manipulation of heparan sulfate or inhibition of viral adhesion by exogenous heparin presents new therapeutic opportunities.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据